The Green Hypothesis
Disclaimer: The following commentary is my take as an outsider, having just read these letters to Z Magazine (subscription required, I think). I cannot point to specific documents or strategic discussions to support it.
The Green Party was founded on the assumption that significant numbers of Americans were good socialists who were only voting for Democrats and Republicans because they had no better options. Americans don't like war or empire; Americans don't like economic exploitation; Americans don't like racism; Americans don't like environmental destruction. But the Democrats and Republicans had captured the electoral machinery and colluded to install barriers to protect the two-party system. So, Americans resigned themselves to lending support to the closest approximation to their true beliefs, or not voting at all.
This hypothesis has now been tested. For three consecutive presidential elections, Americans have had at least one high-profile socialist candidate on their ballots. Very large majorities continue to vote for Democrats and Republicans, or to not vote at all.
It is clear that the populace is in fact highly ideologically regimented, to borrow Bernays' phrasing. The problem is not the electoral system's majoritarian or geographic distortions, or the major parties' crowding-out of competition; the problem is the people. People want what the Democrats and Republicans are offering. People like war, empire, economic exploitation, racism, and environmental destruction. They may call them by other names, like "security," "protecting our interests abroad," "free enterprise," "opposing quotas and reverse discrimination," and "the economy," but the effect is the same.
In such an environment, the Green Party can bank on continuing to garner 2-5% of the vote for the forseeable future.
The Green Party was founded on the assumption that significant numbers of Americans were good socialists who were only voting for Democrats and Republicans because they had no better options. Americans don't like war or empire; Americans don't like economic exploitation; Americans don't like racism; Americans don't like environmental destruction. But the Democrats and Republicans had captured the electoral machinery and colluded to install barriers to protect the two-party system. So, Americans resigned themselves to lending support to the closest approximation to their true beliefs, or not voting at all.
This hypothesis has now been tested. For three consecutive presidential elections, Americans have had at least one high-profile socialist candidate on their ballots. Very large majorities continue to vote for Democrats and Republicans, or to not vote at all.
It is clear that the populace is in fact highly ideologically regimented, to borrow Bernays' phrasing. The problem is not the electoral system's majoritarian or geographic distortions, or the major parties' crowding-out of competition; the problem is the people. People want what the Democrats and Republicans are offering. People like war, empire, economic exploitation, racism, and environmental destruction. They may call them by other names, like "security," "protecting our interests abroad," "free enterprise," "opposing quotas and reverse discrimination," and "the economy," but the effect is the same.
In such an environment, the Green Party can bank on continuing to garner 2-5% of the vote for the forseeable future.